View Full Version : Where Have The Heroes Gone?
Army Chief
08-07-12, 13:06
A worthy read from the current edition of the National Review:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/312924/where-have-heroes-gone-frank-miniter
Discuss amongst yourselves ...
AC
Magic_Salad0892
08-07-12, 13:23
Thanks for posting this, however I don't agree with almost any of it.
It's similar to saying that listening to Marilyn Manson will make you gun down your fellow schoolmates, or watching Trainspotting will make you wanna do heroin.
Movies have come to the point where we finally have actually interesting characters, characters that we can identify with, who are as human as we are. Just... more so.
I don't blame anything on movies, or video games, or music. Blame it on the people.
Cincinnatus
08-07-12, 13:27
Excellent read.
Whatever happened to Randolph Scott?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7ymC7ipQWk
The assumption here is that Heros are defined by Hollywoods depiction of what heros should be like. This is a good read and it does highlight this persons view of how Hollywood has had a hand in the evolution of what a hero may be on screen. In real life I will have to disagree with his definition of what a Hero is. Day in and Day out we see examples of real heros. A good example was on Foxnews.com where there was an article about the LEO who was injured in the Sihk Temple shooting. They hailed him as a hero.
Movies are entertainment, pure, plain and simple. The problem is when people lose touch with reality and place themselves in that world. Almost everyday it seems I am listening to my kids talk about this movie or that movie and what happened and I have to say, "you know that is just a movie and not real life right?" Of course the answer is always "yes Dad sheesh" I do wish there were more traditional hero movies like what I grew up with though.
Cincinnatus
08-07-12, 15:24
Yes, but what we esteem and idealize in entertainment doesn't always have to be so dark and ambivalent. Yes, it is not wholly realistic to have the white shining knight character or even just the always-good one like Andy griffith in the Andy Griffith show, but it is an ideal. ideals by definition are something you value and hold up as an example to strive for. They are not supposed to be representative of what the actual reality is or what is fully realizable. "A man's reach should exceed his grasp." If we are going to wallow in our failings as human-beings and as MEN all the time, how can we ever look up to something better and pull ourselves from the muck of mediocrity?
Moose-Knuckle
08-07-12, 15:28
"All our heroes are dead"
- Magnum Force
Yes, but what we esteem and idealize in entertainment doesn't always have to be so dark and ambivalent. Yes, it is not wholly realistic to have the white shining knight character or even just the always-good one like Andy griffith in the Andy Griffith show, but it is an ideal. ideals by definition are something you value and hold up as an example to strive for. They are not supposed to be representative of what the actual reality is or what is fully realizable. "A man's reach should exceed his grasp." If we are going to wallow in our failings as human-beings and as MEN all the time, how can we ever look up to something better and pull ourselves from the muck of mediocrity?
Very well said.
So do you think that heros based on Hollywoods depiction mirror the Left's view that there should be no difference between any of us? They seem to be bringing down the classic idealic view of what a hero should be. Basically tarnishing the image so to speak
When I look for heroes I tend to look no further than this site. I know that sounds pretty Corney but frankly there are a number of people I would consider silent Heroes on here.
SeriousStudent
08-07-12, 21:34
In the Aurora shootings, there were three men who deliberately and instinctively placed themselves in front of their girlfriends/wives/partner, and died doing so. All three men shielded their loved one with their own flesh, and paid with their lives.
But bad news sells, and blood sells. A truism in the news industry is "If if bleeds, it leads." So you very rarely hear these things.
Yet, there are still heroes. A member of the Tuskegee Airmen lives right here in my home town. It is a very great pleasure to speak to him when he talks at the local public library. Both my son and daughter have met him, shaken his hand, and had an opportunity to thank him. I would argue that he was a twice a hero: in Europe, and back here at home.
One of the young men at work received a Bronze Star with Valor device for his actions under fire in Iraq. No one knew, he did not tell anyone. He was mobilzed, went there, came back and went to work. I found out from an accidental conversation in the parking lot with his sister.
Like so many heroes, he was self-effacing and reticient to tell of his actions. "A lotta guys were braver than me" was his only explanation for that night.
There are still plenty of heroes. We just need to do a better job as a society of thanking them.
BrigandTwoFour
08-07-12, 22:33
From the article:
Meanwhile, sociopaths such as Holmes see a culture that elevates the bad guys to the same moral plane that the good guys occupy. And the bad guys get more attention. The good guys? Not so long ago, armed Americans who shot murderers — see the NRA’s blog The Armed Citizen for examples — were revered as heroes. Today, they are soon forgotten. Worse, on the left, they’re derided.
I think that pretty much covers it right there. Heroes haven't gone away, our culture just doesn't care anymore. Our media (both "news" and popular) prefers to promote the negative, because drama sells.
Drama seems to fall into one of two categories. There are terrible actions that people are thankful they weren't part of, and then want to know everything about. The other is watching the train wreck of other people's lives, allowing the onlooker to feel better about themselves.
Either way, our culture is now more about feeling good about yourself because you're better off than that person you saw on TV than it is about bettering yourself to be like the person you saw on TV.
The article never said that there are no longer heroes as actual persons. Just that society no longer looks at them as heroes. Society acknowledges the heroic action, but does not elevate the "doer" of the heroic action as a hero (even though he is).
Some people do acknowledge the person as a hero, such as here on M4C. But society as a whole has lost the ability to name and revere someone as a hero.
--
Thanks for posting this, however I don't agree with almost any of it.
It's similar to saying that listening to Marilyn Manson will make you gun down your fellow schoolmates, or watching Trainspotting will make you wanna do heroin.
Movies have come to the point where we finally have actually interesting characters, characters that we can identify with, who are as human as we are. Just... more so.
I don't blame anything on movies, or video games, or music. Blame it on the people.
Kinda where I'm at. But at the same time I agree with the sentiment in the article, be nice to have some John Wayne quality good guys again.
With traditional heroes not necessarily in fashion when I was growing up, I had to go looking for them somewhat. Bruce Lee was a big one of mine, sometimes an underdog but always a good guy. After that it was mostly TV good guys like Greg Boyington from "Black Sheep Squadron" and the like.
In the Aurora shootings, there were three men who deliberately and instinctively placed themselves in front of their girlfriends/wives/partner, and died doing so. All three men shielded their loved one with their own flesh, and paid with their lives.
There are still plenty of heroes. We just need to do a better job as a society of thanking them.
Yeah, I also think that is a big part of it. There are also still plenty of "armed citizen" incidents, but they never make the news.
Yeah, I also think that is a big part of it. There are also still plenty of "armed citizen" incidents, but they never make the news.
Oh, they make the news- it's just either super lo-profile on the internet, or national if they totally botch it, or make some comment/action that can cast them in the light of the usual gun-toting wacko. :rolleyes:
As far as the topic goes, strictly from the hollywood POV, imo, it's just not so clear cut anymore. Plain and simple. You can't have the good old-fashioned heroes of yesteryears movies, because they are no longer relevant. By that I don't mean their actions/characters are any less heroic, but that it's so black and white (no, not the color on the tv...:p) it's almost comical- try and tell me you haven't run across some older films and can't help but chuckle at the way things are portrayed?
In this age of intrigue, conspiracy, and scandal, there simply is no baseline for what constitutes a hero or villain anymore, because people have come to realize that everyone is, at some point in time, a little of both, and it seems increasingly the so-called heroes end up being the worst villains.
Or in the words of Bond (James Bond), "history is moving pretty quickly these days, and the heroes and villains keep on changing parts."
Why would one expect todays movies portray things any differently?
But then today has been one of those "glass half empty" sort of days so, salt to taste.
This society is terminally ill. Case in point:
Ask your average 18-30 year old to give you two facts about Nicola Tesla.
Then ask them to give you two facts about snooki.
THEN, call the suicide prevention help line stat.
Army Chief
08-08-12, 09:02
I'm not wholly persuaded that the media/entertainment industry shapes public sentiment -- at least, among adults of average or better intelligence -- so much as it offers a startlingly-accurate reflection of where we're at as a culture. The industry produces what they know they can sell, and although I would like to think that they would hold themselves to a higher standard (just as the media once did), there isn't anything particularly surprising about the lowest common denonimator approach. Quite frankly, it's very, very good for business.
With the younger, (presumably) more impressionable members of society, I'm not quite as sure about this. I do think that the entertainment industry happens to play a significant role in shaping what is "cool," and by extension, in guiding young minds -- or at least re-norming/desensitizing them -- to some degree; especially given the ways in which the typical family experience has changed over the past generation or two. Part of this is our own fault for allowing kids to view some of the things that we do (again, why were there little children in an R-rated midnight showing of the latest dark and violent Batman film?). Without going down the "when I was a boy" path, I do recall my parents putting clear restrictions on what I could and could not watch and/or listen to. When I invariably tried to sneak around them, at least I knew that what I was seeing or hearing was not sanctioned in any sense of the word. It was exciting because it was out-of bounds, but the context of that realization was, I think, important.
As for the rest, I don't really know what effect the Marilyn Mansons and Trainspottings of the world have upon the young (or anyone else, for that matter), but I'm quietly left to wonder what there is to celebrate about their message. While there is something to the old adage "live and let live," I suspect that "garbage in, garbage out" might serve as a semi-valid counterpoint. While we all have different tastes and tolerance levels, it seems that that surest way to gain an audience these days is to shock, offend and debase. Revel in the things that would startle your parents, and flat-out kill your grandparents, right? Again, while a lot of this strikes me as unfortunate, it still manages to sell awfully well.
So, perhaps it isn't as simple as a cause-effect relationship, but more a case of one feeding off of, and reinforcing, the other. Whatever the case, most of us can still see the forest for the trees, and we do not descend into sociopathic drone states wherein we no longer count the cost of our actions. Some, however, do ... and I'm left to wonder if/how the cues and concepts in popular culture might serve to enable and incubate that. Still a personal responsibility? Absolutely. But should we cast off any concerns about shaping influences and contributing factors? Perhaps not. Trouble is, it's pretty difficult to reclaim the lost ground, and if we were to be totally honest about this, it may not be that our culture has changed, so much as the core values that underwrite it.
AC
I think the preception of what a "hero" is has changed..To me (I'm 58) so my preception of what a "hero" is, is different than what alot of much younger folks idea of one is..To me Heros are guys who were awarded the CMOH.. A good example Eddie Rickenbacker, Google him, That man led a life that even hollywood could'nt make up, At one time called FDR's "New Deal" polices, "Socialism"and NBC would'nt put him on the air in rebuttal of FDR's policys after that..These were people who stood for something, ment what they said, and said what they ment. Another example is a friend of mine's late father..During WWII, He and 3 others were trapped behind enemy lines at the start of the battle of the buldge..They holed up in a barn, in the hay loft, and for 3 days the German army marched past this barn, and yet no one stopped to search it..Unbelieveably, they made it back to their own lines..There are probably countless others like him. They stood for something....Sadly, most of them are gone.. It sickens me to hear the media call some NASCAR driver a "hero" why? because he ran around a banked, high speed oval making left turns for 500 miles.. Compare any one of them to a man like Rickenbacker, and tell me he's a hero...He would'nt make a pimple on Ol' Eddie's ass.
montanadave
08-08-12, 11:05
I'm not wholly persuaded that the media/entertainment industry shapes public sentiment -- at least, among adults of average or better intelligence -- so much as it offers a startlingly-accurate reflection of where we're at as a culture. The industry produces what they know they can sell, and although I would like to think that they would hold themselves to a higher standard (just as the media once did), there isn't anything particularly surprising about the lowest common denonimator approach. Quite frankly, it's very, very good for business.
...
Trouble is, it's pretty difficult to reclaim the lost ground, and if we were to be totally honest about this, it may not be that our culture has changed, so much as the core values that underwrite it.
AC
Two thumbs up to this.
I know this ain't gonna sit too well with some, but there's a fundamental disconnect between a society which aspires to represent and nurture the highest ideals of human achievement and a culture which is predicated on an economic model which demands exponential growth to sustain itself while worshipping unbridled greed.
Before anyone becomes apoplectic over that previous remark, insinuating I am condemning free-market capitalism, let me clarify. I support a market economy, as it appears to be the best system yet devised. But capitalism without a conscience is a disaster. Such a system promotes the Gordon Gecko mentality of "greed is good" and encourages people to do whatever is necessary to further their individual financial well-being.
While I'm sure there are some (perhaps many) that draw a moral or ethical distinction between a hedge-fund trader manipulating the markets or creating some arcane investment vehicle to capture another $100 million in profits while screwing their investors and slipping through the regulatory/legal cracks and the guy cheating the welfare or food stamp system, I don't see a lot of daylight. They're both gaming the system to put money in their pockets and rationalizing it by saying "Hey, I gotta get mine and it ain't illegal if I don't get caught."
I'm all for the fella doing an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. And the fellas that bust their ass or dream up a better mousetrap deserve the extra benefits that come their way. But the essential elements here are honesty and integrity. And those are two core values which seem to be in short supply these days.
But if a recall correctly (econ 101 was quite some time ago), that shortage of personal honesty and individual integrity may simply be attributable to a lack of demand. Perhaps we need to demand a little more from our leaders, both in the public and the private sector, as well as from one another.
Thanks for posting AC...a good read.
Maybe we should celebrate heroes that exemplify what we aspire to "be" as opposed to what we "are".
Thanks for posting AC...a good read.
Maybe we should celebrate heroes that exemplify what we aspire to "be" as opposed to what we "are".
One of the most culturally interesting things I've seen is the Japanese willingness to celebrate great men who failed in their attempts to do noble things. They are almost completely unique with this mindset.
Cincinnatus
08-08-12, 14:37
Excellent post, AC. Very insightful, thoughtful, and wise.
Thanks for posting this, however I don't agree with almost any of it.
It's similar to saying that listening to Marilyn Manson will make you gun down your fellow schoolmates, or watching Trainspotting will make you wanna do heroin.
Movies have come to the point where we finally have actually interesting characters, characters that we can identify with, who are as human as we are. Just... more so.
I don't blame anything on movies, or video games, or music. Blame it on the people.
Then realize that you are not just complacent, you are part of the problem.
Then realize that you are not just complacent, you are part of the problem.
I blame the internet and how any opinion no matter how misguided can find validation and support.
:D
It amazes me that some are still oblivious as to the negative impact that the leftist media has had on this nation. Ideology leads some to imagine that impressionable youths are somehow immune for the garbage spewed by MTV, VH1, ABC, etc, but their programs have infected our society despite your oversized blinders.
As of this week they demonize a legitimate businessman running for president and equate him to a heartless killer of the elderly. Lies are now commonplace in defense of the indefensible. The left has no limit, no moral boundary. They will go as far as they are enabled to via the gullible public, they have absolutely no shame.
The problem is real, it does need to be addressed. Idealogical thinking will accomplish nothing, society as a whole needs a more positive direction.
It amazes me that some are still oblivious as to the negative impact that the leftist media has had on this nation. Ideology leads some to imagine that impressionable youths are somehow immune for the garbage spewed by MTV, VH1, ABC, etc, but their programs have infected our society despite your oversized blinders.
As of this week they demonize a legitimate businessman running for president and equate him to a heartless killer of the elderly. Lies are now commonplace in defense of the indefensible. The left has no limit, no moral boundary. They will go as far as they are enabled to via the gullible public, they have absolutely no shame.
The problem is real, it does need to be addressed. Idealogical thinking will accomplish nothing, society as a whole needs a more positive direction.
One thing I noticed watching TV shows from my childhood now out on DVD is how jam packed they were with various liberal / socialist agendas.
What is most interesting to me now is how I missed all of it. I just saw the good guys vs. bad guys, neat cars and things like that. The social indoctrination attempt was completely wasted on me.
Along those lines...
I never jumped off my roof because I thought I could fly like superman.
I never burned down my house because Beavis said "fire."
I never killed a cop because I heard an Ice T record.
I never raped a woman because I read a Playboy or Hustler.
I never did drugs because I saw Scarface.
Many, many people believe criminals are motivated to those actions by those influences...but it's more how criminals are simply attracted to things like guns and money just like many here. But just because we also like guns and money doesn't mean we are Tony Montana.
Now does that mean I support various liberal agendas? Of course not. If I had kids I wouldn't let them watch 60% of the crap on TV. But much as I despise Oprah and the BS that is promoted on Oprah, I don't blame Oprah for destroying the country and wouldn't ban her show. I blame the ****ing retards who gobble up all that shit without any critical thinking.
Ultimately THEY are the problem, and they have been a problem for a long time and they will continue to be a problem long after we are gone.
Great post, but here's the thing. Your described "They" are "us". Not me or you, or most here, but us regardless.
I have absolutely no clue whatsoever how society became so blatantly stupid, it just somehow happened. All we can do now is find a way to convert the lost. Giving up is not an option.
One thing I noticed watching TV shows from my childhood now out on DVD is how jam packed they were with various liberal / socialist agendas.
What is most interesting to me now is how I missed all of it. I just saw the good guys vs. bad guys, neat cars and things like that. The social indoctrination attempt was completely wasted on me.
Along those lines...
I never jumped off my roof because I thought I could fly like superman.
I never burned down my house because Beavis said "fire."
I never killed a cop because I heard an Ice T record.
I never raped a woman because I read a Playboy or Hustler.
I never did drugs because I saw Scarface.
Many, many people believe criminals are motivated to those actions by those influences...but it's more how criminals are simply attracted to things like guns and money just like many here. But just because we also like guns and money doesn't mean we are Tony Montana.
Now does that mean I support various liberal agendas? Of course not. If I had kids I wouldn't let them watch 60% of the crap on TV. But much as I despise Oprah and the BS that is promoted on Oprah, I don't blame Oprah for destroying the country and wouldn't ban her show. I blame the ****ing retards who gobble up all that shit without any critical thinking.
Ultimately THEY are the problem, and they have been a problem for a long time and they will continue to be a problem long after we are gone.
1+ to this sentiment. Ingres up watching violent movies, playing violent video games, had ready access to porn (yes when I was a youth Playboy and Hustler were readily available outside of the wrappers at Eckerd Drugs. And no I didn't read any of the articles). I also inhaled when I was in college. Yet I dont consider myself to be a degenerate; quite contrary I consider myself a productive member of society. Had I watched Mary Poppins or nature TV or some other goodie too shoes stuff I'd still be the same person cause my parents raised me and not the black box nor the movies nor music nor the books I read. My parents raised me and the stuff pouring out of the black box was ALWAYS viewed as entertainment. While outside sources can have an impact on people it is ENTIRELY up to us as to how much we allow it to effect our development. Personally, I view people who blame other things for their own shortcomings as a bigger part of the problem.
YOU are in charge of how much impact outside sources have on your life or the life of those you care about.
I'm not going to offer a lengthy critique, but I will say I disagree with the thesis of the article. The author also entirely missed the boat on the Nolan Batman franchise too, so much so that I have to wonder if he actually even saw the films.
Viacom and other trash media companies produce what sells. You can't peddle your wares to people that don't want them. Give the people what they want.
Jersey Shore is popular because people idolize that lifestyle. They want to be superficial, phony, pleasure obsessed, drunken clown trash. So that's what they're given.
The only hope I have is that a counter-culture movement will emerge, as they typically do. The rigidness and wholesomeness of the 50s brought out the anything goes experiment of the 60s. So if our culture gets so phony that people begin to realize how much prosperity it has caused them, there will be a pushback. And no one will pay to see a Lindsay lohan movie ever again because they don't identify with that culture anymore and see it as nothing but destructive.
Magic_Salad0892
08-08-12, 22:55
Then realize that you are not just complacent, you are part of the problem.
Because I believe in responsibility?
There may be a lot to be said for old time John Wayne heroes, but I personally don't prefer an absolute character like that, and forgive me if I belive that media is rarely more than entertainment.
Even the things considered bad (See my Marilyn Manson, and Trainspotting examples) still have positive messages if you know where to look, or what the artist/author intended.
Jersey Shore is popular because people idolize that lifestyle. They want to be superficial, phony, pleasure obsessed, drunken clown trash. So that's what they're given.
As someone of Italian decent I can assure you that in reality these fools are an embarrassment to both our heritage and the state overall.
But the bigger point is that established media venues have decided to push the envelop rather than generate material that is beneficial to society as a whole. They use their powers to implement an idealology and the weak and directionless have gracefully succumbed.
Because I believe in responsibility?
No, because you are speaking as an ideologue, which is someone who thinks something is ok simply because that is what they believe should be the case in their idealogical scenario.
But if you want to clarify why it's hyperbole that venues such as reality TV and rap are having an adverse effect on society you are welcome to do so at anytime.
Great post, but here's the thing. Your described "They" are "us". Not me or you, or most here, but us regardless.
I have absolutely no clue whatsoever how society became so blatantly stupid, it just somehow happened. All we can do now is find a way to convert the lost. Giving up is not an option.
I don't think it's anything new.
You think we have socialism now? Socialism in the 1930s would make your head spin. We actually used to forcibly sterilize people back then.
You think we have radicalism now? Back in the 1960s they were taking over campuses at gunpoint to force social change.
I suspect if you go back to the FF and the creation of the Constitution there was probably a prominent and well represented dickhead contingent.
Have there been times when things were generally "better"? Absolutely. We mostly got our shit together in the 1980s but even then things were hardly perfect. We pulled together for WWII but in 1941 there was Congresswoman (Jeannette Rankin) who voted against war with Japan following Pearl Harbor.
The pacifist movement leading right up to WWII would probably sicken you. And it was quite substantial, in fact that is the basis for FDRs election in 1940...he promised to keep us out of the war.
The possibly high point seems to be the 1950s when America finally got it's shit together having to fight a war against socialism and imperialism in order to get their head screwed on straight but at the same time we were digging bomb shelters and hoping we wouldn't duke it out with Russia.
All things considered, it's probably not quite as bad as you think.
YOU are in charge of how much impact outside sources have on your life or the life of those you care about.
Generally, yes.
But of course there are exceptions. There are those who don't have control of all their faculties and will be motivated by things that don't make sense. But if you kill a bunch of people because the the Beatles White Album, you were probably gonna kill a bunch of people eventually no matter what. Sooner or later, something...like the neighbors dog, is going to get you going.
As someone of Italian decent I can assure you that in reality these fools are an embarrassment to both our heritage and the state overall.
You're a wop too huh? :D
I used to think the Olive Garden commercials were demeaning. Oh how I miss those days!
Magic_Salad0892
08-09-12, 13:11
No, because you are speaking as an ideologue, which is someone who thinks something is ok simply because that is what they believe should be the case in their idealogical scenario.
But if you want to clarify why it's hyperbole that venues such as reality TV and rap are having an adverse effect on society you are welcome to do so at anytime.
It's going to take me a little while to come up with a good reply to that. But give me a little time.
I'm not sure how you can launch those argumuments at me, and not at SteyrAUG as well, because he's saying the exact same thing I am.
(Not to put the heat on you Steyr.)
I'm not sure how you can launch those argumuments at me, and not at SteyrAUG as well, because he's saying the exact same thing I am.
(Not to put the heat on you Steyr.)
It's because I said it more gooder.
:D
Magic_Salad0892
08-09-12, 15:57
It's because I said it more gooder.
:D
i no talk gud
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.